Posted by Wayne on February 24, 2001 at 09:26:03:
In Reply to: backup computer--more liberal or more conservative? posted by Eins on February 24, 2001 at 08:29:57:
I know what I would do. I would use the new fangled one as the primary. And I would NEVER take it to the edge of NDL as I fear DCS.
What I wish is that the computers would allow us to see the "compartments". For example, it's the fast compartments that I fear the most. They fizz the blood and do nasty things to the nerves. All this excitement about deep stops and super slow average ascent rates is about the fast tissues. Since the computer is also watching the slower ones, and displaying the highest of the bunch, we lose valuable visibility into the interractions.
This is why if a diver does a 50' stop on the way up from 100 the computer is not showing an "improved" saturation status. The fast tissues are dropping (good) and the slower tissues are still increasing in saturation (bad, but still slower than before and if they are not aproaching a bad level, it does not matter on the current dive). The marked reduction in fast tissue N2 is not displayed, because it is now lower than one of the slower tissues which is now displayed. While I am most nervous about the fast groups for instant DCS risk on ascent, I am primarily concerned about the slower ones in repetitive dives and planning. After an hour on the surface, I am pretty much looking only at the computer's slower groups anyway, so why not let me scroll through the groups while diving?
Oh well, that is what I would love to have in a dive computer. Probably too much useless information, but I would get a kick out of knowing it and it would help to entertain me at the safety stops. And in the case of two computers, it would help make a judgement about how to complete day's dive(s).
I realize the computer makers want to make them simple and idiot proof. But I wish they gave interested divers an option of seeing more of the information that is already in there.
Post a Followup